Are OTAs overused?

Acquisition officials express worry

NOTE: This article first appeared on 

A more-nimble and recently expanded acquisition vehicle is in danger of becoming an overused “go-to” solution for agencies -- and earning congressional scrutiny as a result -- two leading acquisition officials said.

“I hope we’re not talking about legislation for [Other Transaction Authorities],” Soraya Correa, the Department of Homeland Security’s chief procurement officer, said in remarks at a Nov. 8 AFFIRM panel. “I feel it’s in the air.”

Correa and Scott Stewart, technical director of procurement at the Defense Information Systems Agency, said they are concerned about overenthusiastic use of OTAs.

Congress authorized OTAs for agencies more widely two years ago in defense authorization legislation, procurement industry expert Larry Allen told FCW. However, he said, Congress didn’t want agencies to go overboard.

DHS and DISA officials have been carefully applying OTAs when the conditions are right, Correa and Stewart said, while also working to tamp down overenthusiastic acquisition managers looking for a quicker acquisition path.

“If somebody comes to us and says, ‘Hey, I want to do an OTA,’” Stewart said, “nine out of 10 times, we talk them out of it.” At the Defense Department, OTAs must meet specific requirements, such as basic, applied, advanced research and prototype projects. The authority can’t be used to develop everyday IT efforts such as a help desk application, he said.

Over-reliance on OTAs risks Congress imposing more limits, Allan said. “There’s definitely a danger of overuse,” he said. “Most companies and agencies approach OTAs responsibly,” but some see it as a shortcut.

The 2019 National Defense Authorization Act, passed in August, has provisions that increased reporting and use-justification requirements for agencies using OTAs.

The change in leadership in the House of Representatives, said Allen, also could precipitate closer scrutiny from acquisition oversight committees. The new chairman of the House Oversight Committee, Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.), is skeptical of higher defense spending and could be looking to rein in acquisition, according to Allen, though he doubted OTA-specific legislation would top of the long list of issues Smith wants the committee to look at in the coming months.

In the meantime, Correa and Stewart advised agencies to use the transaction authority sparingly and appropriately.

“The [acquisition] requirements should drive you to an OTA. An OTA shouldn’t drive you to requirements,” said Correa.

About the Author

Mark Rockwell is a senior staff writer at FCW, whose beat focuses on acquisition, the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Energy.

Before joining FCW, Rockwell was Washington correspondent for Government Security News, where he covered all aspects of homeland security from IT to detection dogs and border security. Over the last 25 years in Washington as a reporter, editor and correspondent, he has covered an increasingly wide array of high-tech issues for publications like Communications Week, Internet Week, Fiber Optics News, magazine and Wireless Week.

Rockwell received a Jesse H. Neal Award for his work covering telecommunications issues, and is a graduate of James Madison University.

Click here for previous articles by Rockwell. Contact him at or follow him on Twitter at @MRockwell4.

Reader Comments

Please post your comments here. Comments are moderated, so they may not appear immediately after submitting. We will not post comments that we consider abusive or off-topic.

Please type the letters/numbers you see above.

WT Daily

Sign up for our newsletter.

Terms and Privacy Policy consent

I agree to this site's Privacy Policy.